Why is our language so limited with respect to knives?

[not2sharp]

Ever since the first humans picked up a rock and inevitably smashed it against another to create a shard we have had knives; and, from both of those tools we have gone on to fashion virtually every commodity of modern society. But while we have developed volumes of language to describe the most minute aspects of most later tools and appliances our language on knives has failed to keep pace. Just read through most discussions on knives on this site, or anywhere else, and we can easily imagine the virtually the same discussion taking place between the earliest knife makers and users; "it is sharp, it cuts, it looks great, and it feels good in hand..." How very different and limited when compared to the montains of detail menutiae which surround our electronics, automobiles, trains, planes, boats, sports and virtually all other things and activities.

We spend a lot of time discussing makers, aesthetics, material composition, finishes and production aspects; All important components to the end result, but this doesn't really tell us what we actually want to know about the product: how well does it cut? what does it cut best? and will this specific knife work best for me in performing whatever task I have in mind? how well will this hold up? To answer those question we tend to either fall back on limited anecdotal information, or to simply supply some generic general response; "with care it should last a lifetime".

I can apprieciate that this is not because of a lack of enthusiam or interests in the subject, nor does it indicate a lack of individual or collective talents or ability, and that part of the problem is not so much the apparent simplicity of the tool but rather the complexity of defining and qualifying and variety of tasks perform with our knives in any statistically meaningful way. We are a long way from rating our knives as we do our tires (good for 50,000 miles). But, the near complete absence of any such information limits what we can say about the performance of our favorite tools and I believe that we can do much better then that. For example, we can take a lesson from a lot of other sports equipment and quantify a knife handle size much the way we would approach grip size on a tennis racket. We know that one size doen't fit all, so why not make it easier to find the right fit? We might also be able to redefine sharpness into something more practical, for instance a rating of the optimal range of force within which a particular blade operates best without disforming or excessively wearing the edge. Thus a very fine edge on a thin bladed knife might be rated at 2 ft.lb, a very efficient cutting tool, whereas a heavier camp knife designed primarily for chopping might be rated at 20x that amount. Intuitively, we know there are difference between the various knife designs, we just have a hard time describing those differences in a meaningful way. Let's discuss.

n2s

 

[Tim616]

I believe Dylan Moran said it best when he was talking about how people over complicate whine.

If I may quote:

" There are two types of wine essentially, and everybody knows this. There’s the one where you drink it and go, "Mmmm, well that’s ok, can we get 8 of those please, give us 8 of those." There’s the other one, you know, where you go "Ga…bt…jesus, WHAT is that?" Very, very occasionally I concede you will hit a subtle one. You know, where you go "Ga…ba…ah, actually that’s not that bad, that is. It’s quite nice." "

 

[not2sharp]

I believe Dylan Moran said it best when he was talking about how people over complicate whine.

If I may quote:

" There are two types of wine essentially, and everybody knows this. There’s the one where you drink it and go, "Mmmm, well that’s ok, can we get 8 of those please, give us 8 of those." There’s the other one, you know, where you go "Ga…bt…jesus, WHAT is that?" Very, very occasionally I concede you will hit a subtle one. You know, where you go "Ga…ba…ah, actually that’s not that bad, that is. It’s quite nice." "

So true, yet it is difficult to taste wine from an uncorked bottle; almost as difficult as gaging a knife over the internet, or until you have used it.

n2s

 

[Gadfly22]

Ever since the first humans picked up a rock and inevitably smashed it against another to create a shard we have had knives; and, from both of those tools we have gone on to fashion virtually every commodity of modern society. But while we have developed volumes of language to describe the most minute aspects of most later tools and appliances our language on knives has failed to keep pace. Just read through most discussions on knives on this site, or anywhere else, and we can easily imagine the virtually the same discussion taking place between the earliest knife makers and users; "it is sharp, it cuts, it looks great, and it feels good in hand..." How very different and limited when compared to the montains of detail menutiae which surround our electronics, automobiles, trains, planes, boats, sports and virtually all other things and activities.

We spend a lot of time discussing makers, aesthetics, material composition, finishes and production aspects; All important components to the end result, but this doesn't really tell us what we actually want to know about the product: how well does it cut? what does it cut best? and will this specific knife work best for me in performing whatever task I have in mind? how well will this hold up? To answer those question we tend to either fall back on limited anecdotal information, or to simply supply some generic general response; "with care it should last a lifetime".

I can apprieciate that this is not because of a lack of enthusiam or interests in the subject, nor does it indicate a lack of individual or collective talents or ability, and that part of the problem is not so much the apparent simplicity of the tool but rather the complexity of defining and qualifying and variety of tasks perform with our knives in any statistically meaningful way. We are a long way from rating our knives as we do our tires (good for 50,000 miles). But, the near complete absence of any such information limits what we can say about the performance of our favorite tools and I believe that we can do much better then that. For example, we can take a lesson from a lot of other sports equipment and quantify a knife handle size much the way we would approach grip size on a tennis racket. We know that one size doen't fit all, so why not make it easier to find the right fit? We might also be able to redefine sharpness into something more practical, for instance a rating of the optimal range of force within which a particular blade operates best without disforming or excessively wearing the edge. Thus a very fine edge on a thin bladed knife might be rated at 2 ft.lb, a very efficient cutting tool, whereas a heavier camp knife designed primarily for chopping might be rated at 20x that amount. Intuitively, we know there are difference between the various knife designs, we just have a hard time describing those differences in a meaningful way. Let's discuss.

n2s

I think you answered your own question -- there is very sophisticated language about blade grinds, steel composition, edge angles, jimping, choils, ricassos, not to mention guards, handle materials, etc. Put that all together, and there are for too many possible combinations for quantifying any particular knife. To take your example about sharpness, two knives with identical edge angles but different blade composition, grind, width and geometry will cut in very different ways.

 

[stoffi]

I think we discuss every possible aspect of knives on this forum. Sure, the generic jargon is like you say, but if a specific question arises it is usually answered by many people.

 

[yablanowitz]

So true, yet it is difficult to taste wine from an uncorked bottle; almost as difficult as gaging a knife over the internet, or until you have used it.

n2s

And there you have it. No one else has your hands, so no one else can say how a given knife handle will fit your hand. No one else has the exact same tasks for their knife as you, or uses the exact same techniques as you, so no one else can tell you how well a given knife will work for you. We can discuss various aspects of any given knife in language that may be incomprehensible to those outside our hobby, but we can't accurately quantify the parts that are most important to us as individuals because of the sheer quantity of variables involved. Inventing new language just to sound sophisticated is snobbery, plain and simple.

 

[not2sharp]

.... Inventing new language just to sound sophisticated is snobbery, plain and simple.

Yet, it seems to work for virtually every product under the sun, except knives.

n2s

 

[FortyTwoBlades]

There's TONS of knife-specific terms. Ask a layperson if they know what a choil is. Or a ricasso. Or what the difference between a clip point and a wharncliffe is. If you ask them what "tang" means they'll tell you an orange-flavored drink mix.

Other terms that will confuse the heck out of non-knife-savvy individuals include, but are not limited to:

-jimping
-blade play
-swedge
-bolster
-jigging
-scales
-half stop
-strop

 

[Gadfly22]

Yet, it seems to work for virtually every product under the sun, except knives.

n2s

OK. Find a rating agency that can make a buck by quantifying knife performance, and maybe it'll happen. But unless the Consumer Product Safety Board or some other federal administrative agency requires those ratings for the sake of safety or some other socially beneficial measure (as per tires in your example), so that manufacturers are forced to comply, I don't know why anyone would try for anything so comprehensive and yet so subjective. Even Consumer Reports and other independent ratings entities don't try for the kind of immensely expensive and industry-wide qualitative assessment you seem to think is feasible.

 

[Mike-The-Knife]

You said it your self in your original post . Since man first knocked 2 rocks together to make a sharp shard . Well although most things in our lives are more complicated and have more parts and such , a knife has not changed that much in all that time . It's still just a sharp thing with a handle on one end to hold it by .

Sure we have come a long way in developing new steels and handle materials , but there are still only so many of each that have proven good and so those are widely used . Very thin or hollow ground blades made out of a tool steel like D2 thats heat treated to a high Rockwell hardness will cut and slice well . How long will it last ? Depends on how much use it and sharpen it . A thick heavy blade 10 inches long made from SR-77 , 1095 or INFI heat treated to be a bit less hard will make a great chopper and wood splitter . How long will it last ? Till your DEAD if you don't cut it with a set of torches . A knife is a basic tool . We DO have enough specs to be able to indentify any knife and know what it can or can't do .

We like out knives BECAUSE they are simple . Otherwise this would be an iPhone forum or something . We go into the wilds , chop and split firewood , make shavings and light our fires with firesteels rather than throw 1/2 a gallon of gas on them and use a BBQ lighter or worse yet , flick a switch and sit in the house by the gas fireplace . So why take one of the last throwbacks to a simpler time and pussy it all up with sheets and sheets of specs and technical terms ? It is what it is .


HOLD MY BEER AND WATCH THIS !

 

[not2sharp]

..., I don't know why anyone would try for anything so comprehensive and yet so subjective. ....

Perhaps as a product differentiation strategy.

n2s

 

[bobusx]

Problem with tech performance data is that so much of knife performance is not mechanical. The human element is probably the single biggest variable in knife performance. A car will mostly perform certain tasks to a relativly consistent level based off of its mechanical design and implementation.

Also, many of those other hobbies have scientific research data that is much more accessible. The profit margins and lack of hyper in depth scientific/engineering of knives prevent that kind of data being available. Kershaw simply does not have the money or need to test their knives to the extent that Ford tests their cars, and I am sure more scientific research and engineering processes go into a car than a knife.

The wine analogy is probably the most accurate, knives are more a matter of taste than performance. I like it that way. It is nice to have a hobby that I can enjoy for its own sake, and go with gut feelings and a little bit of research, than needing to analyze hyper detailed tech data to make sure I am not getting gipped in performance. I wish my headphone hobby was this simple...

 

[Gadfly22]

Perhaps as a product differentiation strategy.

n2s

I see. Kind of like INFI steel or other proprietary metals. Or composite blades with different metals. Or ceramic blades. Or different handle materials or inlays. Or blade sizes or shapes. Or different grinds. Or "sprint runs". Or limited editions. Or coated blades with different colors. Or custom scales. Or patented lock mechanisms. Or trademarked or patented designs like the Spyderco round hole or Byrd teardrop hole.

In short, I don't think "product differentiation" is a strategy that the knife industry needs any help with.

 

[parbajtor]

I think you answered your own question -- there is very sophisticated language about blade grinds, steel composition, edge angles, jimping, choils, ricassos, not to mention guards, handle materials, etc. Put that all together, and there are for too many possible combinations for quantifying any particular knife. To take your example about sharpness, two knives with identical edge angles but different blade composition, grind, width and geometry will cut in very different ways.

And that's before you start going into the japanese terminology associated with their blades. The problem is that many japanese terms don't have an english equivalent. However it must be obvious that the Japanese also ran into this problem because the literal translations of many of the terms are often "poetic" descriptions, eg. "shadow of 1000 leaves", "Oil on water" steel, "wood grain", "burl metal", white paper steel, etc. Japanese culture has a tendency to categorise down to the minutest detail. While it does mean that they can discuss abstract concepts with few misunderstandings over what they are discussing, it also tends to narrow down originality and innovation. Many avenues are only explored because the explorer didn't know you can't do it like that. Tommy Emmanuel credits his ability to play 2 tunes simultaneously, or play the lead riffs, bass riffs and rythmn at the same time, because no one told him he couldn't and the fact that he didn't realise that bands had more than one guitarist.

EDIT: PS, my wife likes knives, particularly the making of them and loves going to hammerins, but doesn't really enjoy the social get togethers where we talk knives and show off our collections. As she says "It's not the people, after all they're the same bunch, mostly , that go to the hammerins. It's the fact that all the talk is about numbers, numbers I can't remember and can't really be bothered with. I think she'd relate better to talking about a blade with a blue paper core and 22 layers of 'oil on water' cladding than a blade with a vg10 core with a pattern welded laminate of 15N20 & 1045 in 22 layers. Maybe it's a bloke thing.

 

[MikeC]

Because were not trying to turn the simple into the complex, in fact I dare say most of us here like knives because of their utter simplicity which equates to one of the most functional tools man has ever known, needed to both survive and thrive. It is high functionality in its most simplistic form, sure you can talk shop and throw around all kind of industry buzz words but why? The joy of handling a simple tool that does so many thing so well shouldn't be cheapened or lessened by convoluted technical jargon, but rather praised for its straight forward design, usefulness and longevity. In all probability man's first tool and its still around, still simple, functional and elegant, lets not monkey it up.